In class, we have been talking about some of the more crazy lawsuits. One interesting suit took place in 1997. It involved bar owner Jesse Ingram and burglar Larry Harris. Jesse's Illinois bar had been the victim of several break-ins. He decided to take action.
Jesse set a trap around the windows of his bar. Harris who was age 37 and under the influence of drugs and alcohol missed the prominently displayed warning signs. He set off the trap as he entered through the window, as a result, he was electrocuted and died.
John Winters, an attorney for the Harris family, said the verdict sends a message that the community is "not going to allow people to take these extreme measures to protect their property." He characterized the decision to rig the tavern with high-voltage security wire "Old West justice." The plaintiff lawyer argues that "If [Harris] hadn't had been there, it wouldn't have happened,". "The electrical device didn't reach out and pull him off the street."
Does this set any legal precedent? If someone dies in a case of self-defense can the perpetrator still be sued in a civil suit? To what extent can we protect property with lethal force?
https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/top-ten-frivolous-lawsuits
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-2003-02-25-0302250038-story.html
This seems in line with the "Stand Your Ground" laws in Florida. If someone tries to breach your home, force can be justified in certain situations. With "3 1/2 minutes", it seemed that the judge based his sentencing on not wanting to have people feel like they have no responsibility to try and prevent death. Juxtaposed with the Andrew Zimmerman, the diverging rulings show that excessive force will not always be a get-out-of-jail card.
ReplyDeleteThis also seems to be the case here. While upholding the law is important, it is just as important to prevent others from abusing them. Death is an extreme punishment for robbery, even though it has been used as a justification before (Micheal Brown was portrayed as an armed robber). I feel that the lawsuit was justified as it discourages people from not taking responsibility if their actions cause the death of others. While the man who died is not innocent, Ingram could have resorted to less severe tactics such as high definition video cameras or otherwise to catch the criminal. He is forced to take partial responsibility by offering compensation, which seems reasonable in this case.